Triggering Question: "What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?"
1: A LACK OF VESTED INTEREST FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS 2: TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR STAFF, PARENTS, AND STUDENTS 3: DIFFERING VIEWS OF A CHILD'S POTENTIAL 4: NO SENSE OF URGENCY 5: MISUNDERSTANDING OR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING DIFFERENTIATION AMONG STUDENT POPULATIONS 6: LACK OF FORMALIZED APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING TECH INTO THE CLASSROOM 7: LACK OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN ASSISTIVE TECH CONSULTANTS AND CONSULTANTS FOR RTI AND THE CURRICULUM CONSULTANTS 8: LACK OF A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELIVERING ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS 9: [DELETE] LACK OF COLLABORATION TO ENSURE ONGOING EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH 10: THE PERPETUATION OF THE 'EXPERT' MODEL 11: IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS TO IMPLEMENT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL 12: DIFFERING VIEWS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF NEED/ EXPERTISE FOR ASSISTIVE TECH PERSONNEL 13: NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO SUPPORT TECH 14: UNDERSTANDING ASSISTIVE TECH IS A TOOL TO ENGAGE STUDENT PARTICIPATION 15: ACCESS TO TEACHING STAFF FOR PD 16: LACK OF PD FOR ALL STAFF - GEN ED AND SPEC ED - IN ASSISTIVE TECH 17: WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION GEN EDUCATORS MISUNDERSTANDING OR POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF ASSISTIVE TECH 18: INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ESPECIALLY FOR PD/TRAINING ON THE DEVICE 19: LACK OF EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND SYSTEMS 20: THE TEACHERS UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO USE ASSISTIVE TECH DUE TO FAIRNESS ISSUE 21: LACK OF A DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH 22: STAFF FEELING OVERWHELMED WITH NEW REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS 23: [DELETE] CONFLICT BETWEEN OLD SCHOOL AND NEW SCHOOL IDEAS ON HOW TO DELIVER CURRICULUM 24: SOME INFLEXIBILITY BY STAFF BECAUSE ASSISTIVE TECH ADAPTATIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS MORE WORK 25: THE DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO ARE INDIFFERENT TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION 26: THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY TO QUALITY STUDENT LITERATURE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL 27: THE NEED FOR FOCUSED COLLABORATION 28: LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR STATES STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE ACCOMMODATIONS 29: WE LACK TEAMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH 30: THE PRESENCE OF A DEFENSIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND FAMILIES 31: LACK OF INCLUSION MODEL - WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT IS SUPPORTED 32: NO CLEAR PATH 33: THE INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF TECH AVAILABLE IN SOME SCHOOLS 34: LIMITATIONS BY STATE AND FEDERAL USE OF FUNDS 35: DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH ASSISTIVE TECH SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR USE BY STUDENTS 36: LACK OF ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AFTER TRAINING 37: THE TIME ELEMENT REQUIRED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 38: LIMITED USE OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF PD 39: LACK OF AN ORGANIZED DATABASE FOR ACCESSIBLE CURRICULUM MATERIALS 40: THE LACK OF PHYSICAL SPACE, TIME, AND FLEXIBILITY WITHIN SCHOOLS FOR EFFICIENT USE OF TECH 41: INADEQUATE TRAINING OF PROVIDERS - SCHOOL TO HOME 42: BURN-OUT 43: MINIMAL USE OF A THOROUGH DECISION-MAKINNG PROCESS 44: CONFLICT BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED 45: FAILURE FOR ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY NICELY 46: INADEQUATE LEVEL OF EVALUATION TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT 47: NEGATIVE PERCEPTION BY OTHERS OR STIGMA BY STUDENTS THEMSELVES WHO NEED TO USE THE ASSISTIVE TECH IN GEN ED CLASSROOMS 48: LACK OF STAFF'S EMPOWERMENT AND PASSION TO STATE THEIR WANTS AND NEEDS 49: ABSENCE OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS 50: POOR COMMUNICATION 51: STAFF CHANGES 52: PROCESS ORIENTED VS. CONTENT ORIENTED INSTRUCTION 53: [DELETE] LACK OF AVAILABLE TECH 54: HIT AND RUN 55: LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF GENERAL ED TEACHERS FOR SPECIAL ED STUDENTS AND THEIR DIFFERENTIATED NEEDS
Table 1 Region 3- List of Barriers
Triggering Question: "What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?"
1: A LACK OF VESTED INTEREST FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS
2: TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR STAFF, PARENTS, AND STUDENTS
3: DIFFERING VIEWS OF A CHILD'S POTENTIAL
4: NO SENSE OF URGENCY
5: MISUNDERSTANDING OR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING DIFFERENTIATION AMONG STUDENT POPULATIONS
6: LACK OF FORMALIZED APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING TECH INTO THE CLASSROOM
7: LACK OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN ASSISTIVE TECH CONSULTANTS AND CONSULTANTS FOR RTI AND THE
CURRICULUM CONSULTANTS
8: LACK OF A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELIVERING ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
9: [DELETE] LACK OF COLLABORATION TO ENSURE ONGOING EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH
10: THE PERPETUATION OF THE 'EXPERT' MODEL
11: IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS TO IMPLEMENT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL
12: DIFFERING VIEWS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF NEED/ EXPERTISE FOR ASSISTIVE TECH PERSONNEL
13: NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO SUPPORT TECH
14: UNDERSTANDING ASSISTIVE TECH IS A TOOL TO ENGAGE STUDENT PARTICIPATION
15: ACCESS TO TEACHING STAFF FOR PD
16: LACK OF PD FOR ALL STAFF - GEN ED AND SPEC ED - IN ASSISTIVE TECH
17: WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION GEN EDUCATORS MISUNDERSTANDING OR POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS
OF THE ROLE OF ASSISTIVE TECH
18: INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ESPECIALLY FOR PD/TRAINING ON THE DEVICE
19: LACK OF EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
20: THE TEACHERS UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO USE ASSISTIVE TECH DUE TO FAIRNESS ISSUE
21: LACK OF A DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH
22: STAFF FEELING OVERWHELMED WITH NEW REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS
23: [DELETE] CONFLICT BETWEEN OLD SCHOOL AND NEW SCHOOL IDEAS ON HOW TO DELIVER CURRICULUM
24: SOME INFLEXIBILITY BY STAFF BECAUSE ASSISTIVE TECH ADAPTATIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS MORE WORK
25: THE DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO ARE INDIFFERENT TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION
26: THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY TO QUALITY STUDENT LITERATURE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL
27: THE NEED FOR FOCUSED COLLABORATION
28: LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR STATES STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WHAT IS
ACCEPTABLE ACCOMMODATIONS
29: WE LACK TEAMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH
30: THE PRESENCE OF A DEFENSIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND FAMILIES
31: LACK OF INCLUSION MODEL - WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT IS SUPPORTED
32: NO CLEAR PATH
33: THE INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF TECH AVAILABLE IN SOME SCHOOLS
34: LIMITATIONS BY STATE AND FEDERAL USE OF FUNDS
35: DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH ASSISTIVE TECH SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR USE BY STUDENTS
36: LACK OF ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AFTER TRAINING
37: THE TIME ELEMENT REQUIRED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
38: LIMITED USE OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF PD
39: LACK OF AN ORGANIZED DATABASE FOR ACCESSIBLE CURRICULUM MATERIALS
40: THE LACK OF PHYSICAL SPACE, TIME, AND FLEXIBILITY WITHIN SCHOOLS FOR EFFICIENT USE OF TECH
41: INADEQUATE TRAINING OF PROVIDERS - SCHOOL TO HOME
42: BURN-OUT
43: MINIMAL USE OF A THOROUGH DECISION-MAKINNG PROCESS
44: CONFLICT BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED
45: FAILURE FOR ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY NICELY
46: INADEQUATE LEVEL OF EVALUATION TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT
47: NEGATIVE PERCEPTION BY OTHERS OR STIGMA BY STUDENTS THEMSELVES WHO NEED TO USE THE ASSISTIVE TECH IN GEN ED CLASSROOMS
48: LACK OF STAFF'S EMPOWERMENT AND PASSION TO STATE THEIR WANTS AND NEEDS
49: ABSENCE OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS
50: POOR COMMUNICATION
51: STAFF CHANGES
52: PROCESS ORIENTED VS. CONTENT ORIENTED INSTRUCTION
53: [DELETE] LACK OF AVAILABLE TECH
54: HIT AND RUN
55: LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF GENERAL ED TEACHERS FOR SPECIAL ED STUDENTS AND THEIR
DIFFERENTIATED NEEDS